About my predictions, well ….
Figures based on results as of 2 a.m. Wednesday from WHOI:
| Race | My prediction | The result |
| Governor | ||
| Rod Blagojevich (D) | 43.5 percent | 49 percent |
| Judy Baar Topinka (R) | 40 percent | 40 percent |
| Rich Whitney (G) | 13 percent | 11 percent |
| Others | 5 percent | 0 percent |
State House, 92nd District |
||
| Aaron Schock (R) | 54 percent | 59 percent |
| Bill Spears (D) | 46 percent | 41 percent |
| State Senate, 46nd District | ||
| Dave Koehler (D) | 48.5 percent | 58 percent |
| Ernie Russell (R) | 51.5 percent | 42 percent |
| Congress, 18th District | ||
| Ray LaHood (R) | 59.5 percent | 67 percent |
| Steve Waterworth (D) | 39.5 percent | 33 percent |
I got Topinka’s total on the nose, but was off on Blago’s final total by 5.5 points because I underestimated the votes the also-rans would would generate. Still, with 11 percentage points, the Green Party has earned itself a place on the ballot. And for those who think Whitney stole the anti-Blago vote from Topinka, do you really think that 9 out of every 11 Green Party voters would naturally have gone with Topinka, a Republican?
I predicted an eight percentage point victory by Schock, and was shocked that the margin was actually 18 points. I remain convinced that Spears would have made a great legislator, albeit not a great campaigner. I modestly suggest Schock will be a modest legislator, but enjoy success through superior campaigning skills.
I was happily surprised that Koehler won by 16 points instead of losing by 3, meaning I grossly overestimated the power of name recognition and negative campaigning. Koehler will enjoy Shadid’s support and contacts and will be an effective legislator.
And I freely admit that I my prediction of a 21 point victory for LaHood over Steve Waterworth was wishful thinking on my part. Instead, LaHood’s vote total was more double his opponent’s. No matter how you spin it, that’s a huge margin that will discourage anyone considering running against LaHood. Too bad, because I remain convinced he is vulnerable against the right kind of candidate.
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
Bill one thing that cracks my cookie in this election. No one, and I’m someone who will vote across party lines, but no one covers the third party during election night and offers results for the third party effort. If that isn’t bullshit. I think that if there are 3 parties running in the election then all 3 should have coverage by the major media.
Well, LaHood lost 33% of the vote to someone who basically didn’t campaign. Schock ran a great campaign, and one has to admit that he is telegenic.
But the Koehler-Russel race: I can’t wait to see what Willy-Nilly says about that one.
I’m amazed that Aaron got the votes that he got… I was certain at the worst it would be a LOT closer. The guy is pretty much bullet proof if he’s able to win by that much in a Democratic leaning district. My guess is that he will continue in the 92nd until Uncle Ray hangs it up. My hat’s off to him for pulling off what I thought was impossible… a double digit victory over what appeared to be a very popular Bill Spears.
For Aaron Schock to win by that big a margin, in a moderate district, in a heavily Dem year suggests he is a formidable candidate for the future.
No, it means the man is doing his job. If he weren’t I’d vote no.
I’m not sure that he truly IS doing his job, when 5 of the mayors in his district backed Bill Spears. I would think that the mayors would have the best handle on whether or not Aaron is TRULY doing his “job.” Aaron, however, attracts the voters, and in the end, that’s all that counts. Votes often come from “style” as opposed to “substance.” Aaron certainly has the style that brings ‘em in. Doing his job, in the end, isn’t the deciding factor, it would appear.
Lenin wins – argh!
PREGO; EXCEPT FOR JIM ARDIS, THE ENDORSEMENT OF THOSE CLOWN MAYORS WAS AN ABSOLUTE NON-FACTOR; THE ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN OF SHOCK WAS FAR SUPERIOR THAN SPEARS.
Clown mayors? Where does that come from? West Peoria and Peoria Heights are CLOWN towns? Or are the mayors there just clowns? I sort of like Mayor Dillon and Mayor Allen, I’ve met them both. They hardly seem like “clowns” to me. They actually seem like they care about what happens in their respective communities. Your assessment of “clown mayors” makes no sense to me. If you’ve met them all, and think they’re stupid, have at it. My guess is that you never have.
As for “advertising,” you hit the nail on the head. In the end, it was all about “advertising,” and the people bought it. “Clowns” or not, I think those mayors DO know what’s going on in their burgs.
“As for “advertising,†you hit the nail on the head. In the end, it was all about “advertising,†and the people bought it.”
It doesn’t matter how good your message is if you can’t get it out in an effective manner.
Spears’ advertising, frankly, looked canned… like something that was bought off-the-shelf from a political consultancy and then voiced over with a Spears-specific message.
It’s important to note that, among Spears/Schock and Lenin/Russell, the one running the negative ads lost.
[...] One suprise was the local election between Bill Spears, and Aron Shock. Shock got 59% of the vote which is amazing in a Democrat District. I give them both credit for running a pretty clean campaign. I give Shock credit for some great commercials. The Peoria Pundit has some of the other local election results. [...]
When I got the campaign lit from Spears claiming that “HE” had gotten the cash for the I-74 upgrade, I thought give me a break it will be a cold day in you know where if I am going to vote for that polititian. Before that I had not really been a Schock supporter. The margain was based on a great campaign from Schock, and a whole lot of political BS from Spears.
Spears is an empty suit IMHO. He and Ricca both have been on my porch. I was alot more impressed with Ricca.
Yes Roman, Peoria IS the only town in central Illinois that matters. We were so stupid to think otherwise.
Paul Wilkinson, didn’t you work the Schock campaign?? I thought I saw you in one of his ads.
Ok, here is an ugly truth:
(source: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/308/5728/1623 )
We love to believet that people base their votes on rational thought. That simply isn’t true; votes are often related to impressions; visual or otherwise.
The article I linked to has data which shows that people correctly picked the winner of congressional races about 70% of the time based soley on a 1 second exposure to the face of each candidate!
In the Schock-Spears campaign, we had a young, handsome, well spoken young man against a rather slow spoken “regular guy”.
I went to the debate at the Rotary club; had it been a prizefight the referee would have stopped it.
Schock came across as being very convincing; Spears seemd kind of slow and dull.
BUT, when you *read* what Schock actually said: much of it made little or no sense; in fact, on logical grounds, he actually argued against himself at times.
Something similar happended in the Koehler-Russel debate. Koehler was together and articulate; Russel appeared to be old, jaundiced with a Dick Cheney type grimmace.
Most of the time, Russell spat out Limbaugh type talking points, but I actually LIKED what he had to say about education (came from his Boy’s Club work?)
As far as “the positive campain won”: that is a chicken and the egg type of thing. Koehler ran positive because he knew that he had a lead; same with Schock.
One goes negative when they are behind and need to catch up. Ask Rove.
Remember that Shock’s campaign against Slone wasn’t always positive.
Jim, I have to agree with you that I was also not a Shock supporter, but I’ve got to give some props to the kid. He worked the far southside (mostly democratic) like a “working girl” at a convention.
I would like to repeat the point Vonster made above – in the Schock/Spears and the KOEHLER/Russell campaigns – the ones that ran a totally positive campaign and refrained from negative/attack ads are the ones who won (Schock and Koehler). The negative campaign ads didn’t work for Spears and Russell. And hello, Koehler is a Dem and Schock is a Rep.
That really speaks volumes to me. One from each party.
Lastly, here here to the media covering third parties! Here’s the link to the County’s official posting on the results – http://www.peoriacounty.org/countyClerk/elecresults/110706/cumulative.html
and I’d like to point out that Green Party Rich Whitney got almost 17% of the vote – no small achievement. 10.46% of the statewide vote (over 342,000 votes) having only spent about $30,000 on his campaign. Thanks to all of you who did vote for him. I am most satisfied with having voted Green.
Sorry Giselle but IMHO Koehler is a full-on socialist.
It was noted on the WEEK election coverage that the green party breaking the 5% barrier could well be the story of the night in the long run. Getting the favorable ballot access of a “major party” is a huge advantage and in a normal year, could be very damaging to liberal/progressives.
MJ
Again, I think the Green Party “success” was ostly a dissatisfation with Blago and JBT. 10% is nothing to sneeze at, but in the other races, they often didn’t approach 5%. How many of these voters are now dyed-in-the-wool Green Party supporters? My guess is few and far between. Green Party won’t keep this momentum – not by a long shot. Four years from now, I don’t think they will pull half what they did this time around.
It was a very good day for Central Illinois — Happy/delighted to see Aaron AND Mike returned to Springfield. We will continue to support Aaron AND vote for Mike now that we will be living in Mike’s district. And Aaron even used one of my images in his publication that arrived yesterday.
Both young men are good for all the people of Illinois.
Bill is key-word blocking the word s o c i a l i s t.
Ooops – nevermind
Vonster: Not deliberately. I don’t know why that post was blocked by my spam filter. Between midnight last night and right now, my spam filter has stopped 553 comments. I was able to find three legit comments in that batch. I’d say that’s a good percentage, considering the alternative — 550 spam comments.
I saw Smith in a photo op the other day. Oof. I hope he gets help soon. Nadler could help him out.
cgiselle: you are aware that the county of Peoria results don’t include the City of Peoria results, right? Hint: look at how low the numbers are.
As far as the positive/negative stuff, much of how that works depends on who starts with a lead.
Bill your time stamps on posts is still on daylight time. One hour ahead.
Ollie – no, I didn’t know that! Hmmn, I’ll be visiting the City website soon.
Thanks, sincerely, for the education, professor!
[...] I finally get a chance to check out the comments to Billy’s election results only to find out that it had turned into a “Aaron Schock is Gay” forum. [...]
[...] 2004 by 235 votes over incumbent Ricca Slone. Not a re-election, and NOT overwhelming. He was re-elected ONCE in 2006 by beating challenger Bill Spears 58-41 percent. As to whether or not this margin is entirely due [...]